JL071A Switch

[Braclad]

I am using a 3810M (JL071A) to route video traffic between two switches. Is there any benefit in using adjacent ports on the 3810M?

[parnassus]

Intriguing question your one; conversely I would also add: is there any drawback in using non adjacent ports on the 3810M?

But using the word "adjacent" presupposes that there are "group of ports" and so there are ports that are adjacent each others and ports that aren't.

As extension: what technical consideration can a user do when he/she physically groups together switch ports in deploying specific tasks (like Port Trunking/LAG, as example)?

Your original question is interesting because it presupposes (1) that physical ports are (Hardware) grouped - and that can be obvious from the point of view of the product internal Hardware engineering aka circuitry - and (2) that any data traffic that is switched/routed between those groups of physical ports by means of the Switch processing software/hardware has (or could have) lower performances with respect to the same type of data traffic when it is switched/routed *within* the same group of ports.

So:

• Does the Aruba 3810M groups ports? if so, in which (Hardware) way? Group of six or twelve (e.g. 1-12, 13-14, and so on...) or what?
• Does this (Hardware) grouping produce lower performance in terms of data traffic switching/routing with respect to the same data traffic when it is switched/routed staying within the same group of ports?
• Are there differences? if so, are them negligible or not?

[blanny]

The answer is no, there is no advantage to using adjacent ports .  You will get the same performance across ports 1 and 2 as you would across ports 1 and 48.  Yes ports have physical groups, but physical grouping does not affect performance, at least on the 3810M.

See the 3810M Tolly report below.  3810M can do all ports to all ports at line rate :)

http://tolly.com/ts/2016/Aruba/3810M/Tolly216122Aruba3810MPerformancevsCisco.pdf